Since the one of the arguments for the decreasing order seems to just be textual representation - do we want to tweak the repr to something like
Polynomial(lambda x: 2*x**3 + 3*x**2 + x + 0) (And add a constructor that calls the lambda with Polynomial(1)) Eric On Sat, 30 Jun 2018 at 14:30 Eric Wieser <wieser.eric+nu...@gmail.com> wrote: > “the intuitive way” is the decreasing powers. > > An argument against this is that accessing the ith power of x is spelt: > > - x.coeffs[i] for increasing powers > - x.coeffs[-i-1] for decreasing powers > > The former is far more natural than the latter, and avoids a potential > off-by-one error > > If I ask someone to write down the coefficients of a polynomial I don’t > think anyone would start from c[2] > > You wouldn’t? I’d expect to see > > [image: f(x) = a_3x^3 + a_2x^2 + a_1x + a_0] > > rather than > > [image: f(x) = a_0x^3 + a_1x^2 + a_2x + a_3] > > Sure, I’d write it starting with the highest power, but I’d still number > my coefficients to match the powers. > > > Eric > >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
